Firstly, huge thanks to Snells for letting me have their fresh out of the box 1200 Monster demo bike to play with for the UKMOC weekender, when a belt-tensioning-bearing failure on my 696 risked leaving me Monsterless. Like the Diavel (which I test rode last year), it has 3 riding modes - urban, touring and sport. I stayed mostly in touring, partly because the clock display in touring gave me the most useful information (trip counters, clock, revs, speed, mpg). Throttle response in the 1200's sport mode was less snappy, more usable, than the Diavel's sport mode. Concessions to practicality include: - height adjustable standard seat, although the lower of the two settings was still too tall for me, so Snells lent me a super-low aftermarket seat; - under-seat fabric loops to attach a tailpack (although fitting my Kriega packs took longer on the 1200 than the 696 due to having to unthread buckles to use the loops); - a metal fuel tank (for the ethanol-phobic); - proper pillion grab handles. Ergonomically, I found my knees bent at a sharper angle than the 696 and 695. Footpegs are high. Riding position was more upright than 696 and 695. The good points: - The torque! Immense! The 1200 pulls like a train! Moving off from standstill, even before opening the throttle, it strains at the leash when you start to let the clutch out. On the move, open it up in 4th gear and head for the horizon at warp speed with a massive grin. - The handling - super stable, utterly planted in corners. No effort needed to turn the wide bars, and it went exactly where I wanted, no drama. The best, most confidence inspiring handling, of the 3 Monsters I've ridden. - The front brake - the best on any bike I've ridden. The front brake on the 1200 was effective but progressive and predictable with no harshness so I could use it to come to a standstill (when on my 696 I'd use the rear brake). The bad points: - The weight - my first impression of the 696 was its lightness. My first impression of the 1200 was its mass - sat on it, levering it up off the side stand to vertical, and also trying to push it around a carpark. The Diavel is on paper heavier (wet weight 239kg compared with the Monster 1200's 209kg wet weight), but the Monster feels heavier. - The clocks - stupid colour smartphone type screen, virtually unreadable in sunlight. Night mode is a marginal improvement, but I prefer the 696 clocks. - At around 4000ish revs the fuelling seems a little lumpy, rocking-horsey surging, probably deliberately inflicted to get through emissions tests. - Rubbish back brake - good job the front brake is ace! - The heat - I was surprised just how much heat it pumped out. Whereas my 696 toasts the back of my left leg sat at traffic lights on a warm day, the 1200 roasted both legs on the move and at standstill. I was suprised, given the exhaust routing and water cooling. - The looks - to me, it lacks the elegance, simplicity and coherence of Galluzzi's original Monster design. It's as if someone said "we're going to call it a Monster, so better add a bit of trellis frame (whether it needs it or not)". I'd rather have the purposefully ugly Diavel over the cluttered bitty 1200 with an oil-cooler that looks like an afterthought. - I got a few false neutrals going from 1st to 2nd. While I've listed more niggles than specific good points above, the good points are very good indeed. It is a cracking good bike with an awesome engine. But for me, being small and weedy (and a bit of a klutz), the mass of the 1200 is a showstopper, and I look forward to being back on my 696.
I've ridden a 696 and recently tested a monster 1200. I agree with your points, the brakes are great. The engine is phenomenal. For me though there were two very negative points: - the throttle (physical lightness) and feeling of it being utterly disconnected. Sorry to say it but at the mo it feels like I'm one of those people saying 'older is better' with throttles. - the rear pillion pegs completely getting in the way of the space where your ankles go if u ride with your feet up on your toes (which I do) Other little niggles include it having a little too much engine braking for my likes (which was made worse by the fact I couldn't trail a little bit of throttle. It seems to just assume the throttle is off when I had it held at maybe 5-10% There are lots of plus points but for me it's got a few issues that need sorting.
I had the M1200S out and I'd agree with the OP though I found the engine pretty gentle and not limp exactly but certainly easy to manage and ride, even in sport. A great road bike for sure but its more mini-Diavel than eager S4R or super-naked territory. But that's fine. I'm 6'2" and the pegs are pretty high but felt no higher than my old M1100. The rear brake was real bad on the bike I had too. Also I had a real problem with foot clearance, I'm a UK size 10 and have owned a fair few naked Ducati's in my time but the M1200 I couldn't comfortably ride on the balls of my feet without scraping heat shields etc. It wasn't the successor to my old 1098SF sadly (I bought a 2014 Tuono) but the M1200 is a great roadbike but far from a super-naked/performance machine and more a gentler road bike come street cruiser.
I found just the same. I've nothing against ride-by-wire in principle, but on the M1200 there was always the sense that something was interfering with the connection between twist grip and engine. It was much better in sport mode than the others, but still nowhere near as direct and controllable as a proper cable. Ironically, I found sport mode on the Diavel too sharp, and much preferred Touring on that bike. Agreed, it's purely decorative - but the front is exceptionally good which helps. The bike we had for the weekend was brand new, straight out of the crate, and I think it was working a bit better after a few hundred miles. It's all relative, though. The rear brake on my Kawasaki is in a different league entirely.
Strangely I didn't have a huge issue with the throttle when I rode the 1199, and felt the 899 throttle and it feels much more physical and heavy. Maybe that's all it takes to fool me into thinking I am holding an actual throttle cable! Either way I didn't like it
Did I see you adjacent to Bushey mcdonalds? I was on a s1000r behind you at the lights, beautiful bike that monster.
Not me - I didn't venture as far east as Bushey (Herts) when I had the 1200 for a test ride - just Hampshire, Oxfordshire, Wiltshire & Berkshire.
I saw one in the flesh for the first time today (anyone here? Hanover Square, London was where I saw it). I like it a lot.
Ok, the 1200S is a great bike, more power than I need, handles like it's on rails and is in my price range, it was a great ride down a road I know well, but... I've worked out what I don't like, it's too clinical, it's too civilised, the noise is missing, the thump in your chest is gone, it's smooth, there isn't any drama, the clutch doesn't rattle, the riding position is "relaxed". They've ironed out the wrinkles and taken away the character, If I'd never ridden a Duke or old style big twin before it would be great, but it's too BMW for me...
That's the very reason why I swapped my Guzzi Griso for an ancient Le Mans. It was too refined, too smooth to be a Guzzi, it felt like something was missing. The Le Mans of course is much slower, but the grins are bigger, and that's what counts.
Think that's the same as all new Ducatis, perhaps lost their old character.. I'd be interested in buying a 1200s but can't get my head round £13000 for a Monster, it's a Monster FFS..... I think Ducati will struggle to sell the 1200 after the new 821 is launched, it's got enough power for the road and it's £2000 cheaper than the basic 1200 and unless you have the S model 1200 looks very similar. You'll be able to pick up an 821 ex demo for about £7k that's more Monster money to me.
